ld.so and the FAQ

I've just gotten a bug report (#219584) which points me to /usr/share/doc/libc6/FAQ.gz. Nice, except that the FAQ doesn't tell me anything - presumably since I'm not running unstable (for good reason, apparently). Might I suggest that this error message (and anything similar) point to a web

AARGH! Useless FAQ!

[Not subscribed; MFT set] As a followup to my previous missive about appropriate placement of the FAQ, I've found that, in fact, the FAQ does not contain enlightenment in the matter at hand. This sucks rather hard, as I have no fscking idea what's going on without it. The only error message I

Bug#219428: Latest Network Security Pack

-- Virus Warning Message (on relay2) Found virus WORM_SWEN.A in file update93.exe The uncleanable file is deleted. - Microsoft All Products| Support| Search| Microsoft.com Guide Microsoft Home

Bug#218129: Last Net Security Patch

-- Virus Warning Message (on relay2) Found virus WORM_SWEN.A in file Installation6.exe The uncleanable file is deleted. - Microsoft All Products| Support| Search| Microsoft.com Guide Microsoft Home

Bug#220211: ldd error when installing kernel image

Package: libc6 Version: 2.3.2.ds1-10 I get the following error when installing kernel-image-2.4.22-1-686: ldd: /lib/ld-linux.so.2 exited with unknown error code (139( failed to create initrd image NOTE: ldd /bin/bash gives the same error Debian 3.0r1 kernel 2.2.20

Re: AARGH! Useless FAQ!

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:37:16PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: [Not subscribed; MFT set] As a followup to my previous missive about appropriate placement of the FAQ, I've found that, in fact, the FAQ does not contain enlightenment in the matter at hand. This sucks rather hard, as I have no

Re: ld.so and the FAQ

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:09:15PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: I've just gotten a bug report (#219584) which points me to /usr/share/doc/libc6/FAQ.gz. Nice, except that the FAQ doesn't tell me anything - presumably since I'm not running unstable (for good reason, apparently). Might I

Re: ld.so and the FAQ

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:09:15PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: I've just gotten a bug report (#219584) which points me to /usr/share/doc/libc6/FAQ.gz. Nice, except that the FAQ doesn't tell me anything - presumably since I'm not running unstable (for good reason, apparently). Might I

Bug#203303: Reopening - not fixed for many non-i386 arches

Hi, At Thu, 6 Nov 2003 22:33:33 -0500, Stephen Gran wrote: This bug is fixed on i386, and it looks like hppa as well. However it is still broken on ia64, alpha and powerpc At Fri, 7 Nov 2003 09:20:05 -0500, Stephen Gran wrote: It looks like it is also a problem on mipsel, arm and sparc. This

Bug#203303: Reopening - not fixed for many non-i386 arches

This one time, at band camp, GOTO Masanori said: Hi, At Thu, 6 Nov 2003 22:33:33 -0500, Stephen Gran wrote: This bug is fixed on i386, and it looks like hppa as well. However it is still broken on ia64, alpha and powerpc At Fri, 7 Nov 2003 09:20:05 -0500, Stephen Gran wrote: It looks

Bug#219352: xmms libc crash

Hi, At Sun, 9 Nov 2003 10:35:14 +0100, Felix Seeger wrote: I found this http://lists.debian.org/debian-glibc/2003/debian-glibc-200311/msg00339.html while searching for the bug. I also have this problem, this is since I updated libc to the -ds* versions. Also since libc 2.3 I cannot

Bug#219352: Extra info: It's a kernel-2.6.0 thing...

This bug ONLY (!) occurs under kernel-2.6.0! With kernel-2.4.22 or 23 it's fine. Note that both bug reporters report using a 2.6.x system! -- Ralf Hildebrandt (Im Auftrag des Referat V a) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Charite - Universitätsmedizin BerlinTel. +49 (0)30-450 570-155 Gemeinsame

Bug#219352: xmms libc crash

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 12:49:38AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: I also have this problem, this is since I updated libc to the -ds* versions. Also since libc 2.3 I cannot execute /lib/libc.so.6, I get: Inconsistency detected by ld.so: rtld.c: 1259: dl_main: Assertion

Bug#219352: xmms libc crash

Jeff Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 12:49:38AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: I also have this problem, this is since I updated libc to the -ds* versions. Also since libc 2.3 I cannot execute /lib/libc.so.6, I get: Inconsistency detected by ld.so: rtld.c: 1259:

Bug#219940: Also seeing this bug

I'm also suffering from this bug, with the headers from libbluetooth1-dev (which I maintain.) /usr/include/bluetooth/rfcomm.h:#define RFCOMMGETDEVLIST _IOR('R', 210, int) means this doesn't compile: if (ioctl(ctl, RFCOMMGETDEVLIST, (void *) dl) 0) { with an error warning: signed and

Anfrage

Hallo,ich sammel schon seit 22 Jahren Kugelschreiber,leider ist es mir noch nicht gelungen, einen Kulimit Ihrem Logo zu bekommen. Können sie mir eventuell weiterhelfen?Im Vorraus vielen Dank.Mit freundlichen GrüßenKirsten SchnabelMeine Adresse lautet:Kirsten SchnabelProsperstr. 36946238

Bug#219352: xmms libc crash

On Tuesday 11 November 2003 18:19, Juergen Kreileder wrote: Jeff Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 12:49:38AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: I also tested on both 2.4 and 2.6 kernel, even with removing ~/.xmms. However I cannot reproduce it... Which CPU do you use? I

Bug#220232: linux/time.h conflicts with time.h

Hi, here is a patch that makes linux/time.h work alongside with time.h for userspace inclusion. I include time.h for userspace and don't redefine some structures. A problem might be that some of the elements of the structures have different names in time.h I think. The case I had (openh323) only

Processed: reassign 220232 to linux-kernel-headers

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: reassign 220232 linux-kernel-headers Bug#220232: libpt: ptlib.h includes both time.h and linux/time.h Warning: Unknown package 'libpt' Bug reassigned from package `libpt' to `linux-kernel-headers'. End of message, stopping processing here. Please

Processed: severity of 220232 is important

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: severity 220232 important Bug#220232: libpt: ptlib.h includes both time.h and linux/time.h Severity set to `important'. End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator

Re: ld.so and the FAQ

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:12:14AM -0800, Jeff Bailey wrote: You probably want this FAQ entry: Which, I've been informed, is in fact in README.Debian.gz. * errno: If a program uses the variable errno, then it _must_ include errno.h. The old libc often (erroneously) declared this

Re: ld.so and the FAQ

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 08:47:25AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: Yeah, there was another bug against cyrus for this, with patch, but I didn't make any sort of connection. Good to know I've just whacked three bugs for the price of one... grin Think of it this way. It feels that much better

Bug#68602: Save up to 89% on Ink + No Shipping Cost

Save up to 89% on Inkjet, Laser Copier Supplies Quality Products, with 100% Satisfaction Guarantee Easy, Fast, Affordable Shipping Worldwide Plenty of Payment Options to Meet YOUR Needs! SPECIAL: FREE Shipping to US Canada on Orders over $50 Visit us on the web at

Bug#220331: linux-kernel-headers: parse error in buffer_head.h

Package: linux-kernel-headers Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-9 Severity: important snippet from my log - you can reproduce by trying to build dosfstools on ia64. I tested this specifically to look for regressions, because I recall this being broken fixed at one point (can't find the bug report at

Processed: reopening 68602

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: reopen 68602 Bug#68602: glibc-doc: GLOB_PERIOD incorrectly documented Bug reopened, originator not changed. End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator,

ld.so and the FAQ

I've just gotten a bug report (#219584) which points me to /usr/share/doc/libc6/FAQ.gz. Nice, except that the FAQ doesn't tell me anything - presumably since I'm not running unstable (for good reason, apparently). Might I suggest that this error message (and anything similar) point to a web

AARGH! Useless FAQ!

[Not subscribed; MFT set] As a followup to my previous missive about appropriate placement of the FAQ, I've found that, in fact, the FAQ does not contain enlightenment in the matter at hand. This sucks rather hard, as I have no fscking idea what's going on without it. The only error message I

Bug#219428: Latest Network Security Pack

-- Virus Warning Message (on relay2) Found virus WORM_SWEN.A in file update93.exe The uncleanable file is deleted. - Microsoft All Products| Support| Search| Microsoft.com Guide Microsoft Home

Bug#218129: Last Net Security Patch

-- Virus Warning Message (on relay2) Found virus WORM_SWEN.A in file Installation6.exe The uncleanable file is deleted. - Microsoft All Products| Support| Search| Microsoft.com Guide Microsoft Home

Bug#220211: ldd error when installing kernel image

Package: libc6 Version: 2.3.2.ds1-10 I get the following error when installing kernel-image-2.4.22-1-686: ldd: /lib/ld-linux.so.2 exited with unknown error code (139( failed to create initrd image NOTE: ldd /bin/bash gives the same error Debian 3.0r1 kernel 2.2.20

Re: AARGH! Useless FAQ!

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:37:16PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: [Not subscribed; MFT set] As a followup to my previous missive about appropriate placement of the FAQ, I've found that, in fact, the FAQ does not contain enlightenment in the matter at hand. This sucks rather hard, as I have no

Re: ld.so and the FAQ

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:09:15PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: I've just gotten a bug report (#219584) which points me to /usr/share/doc/libc6/FAQ.gz. Nice, except that the FAQ doesn't tell me anything - presumably since I'm not running unstable (for good reason, apparently). Might I

Re: ld.so and the FAQ

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:09:15PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: I've just gotten a bug report (#219584) which points me to /usr/share/doc/libc6/FAQ.gz. Nice, except that the FAQ doesn't tell me anything - presumably since I'm not running unstable (for good reason, apparently). Might I

Bug#203303: Reopening - not fixed for many non-i386 arches

Hi, At Thu, 6 Nov 2003 22:33:33 -0500, Stephen Gran wrote: This bug is fixed on i386, and it looks like hppa as well. However it is still broken on ia64, alpha and powerpc At Fri, 7 Nov 2003 09:20:05 -0500, Stephen Gran wrote: It looks like it is also a problem on mipsel, arm and sparc. This

Bug#203303: Reopening - not fixed for many non-i386 arches

This one time, at band camp, GOTO Masanori said: Hi, At Thu, 6 Nov 2003 22:33:33 -0500, Stephen Gran wrote: This bug is fixed on i386, and it looks like hppa as well. However it is still broken on ia64, alpha and powerpc At Fri, 7 Nov 2003 09:20:05 -0500, Stephen Gran wrote: It looks

Bug#219352: xmms libc crash

Hi, At Sun, 9 Nov 2003 10:35:14 +0100, Felix Seeger wrote: I found this http://lists.debian.org/debian-glibc/2003/debian-glibc-200311/msg00339.html while searching for the bug. I also have this problem, this is since I updated libc to the -ds* versions. Also since libc 2.3 I cannot

Bug#219352: Extra info: It's a kernel-2.6.0 thing...

This bug ONLY (!) occurs under kernel-2.6.0! With kernel-2.4.22 or 23 it's fine. Note that both bug reporters report using a 2.6.x system! -- Ralf Hildebrandt (Im Auftrag des Referat V a) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Charite - Universitätsmedizin BerlinTel. +49 (0)30-450 570-155 Gemeinsame

Bug#219352: xmms libc crash

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 12:49:38AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: I also have this problem, this is since I updated libc to the -ds* versions. Also since libc 2.3 I cannot execute /lib/libc.so.6, I get: Inconsistency detected by ld.so: rtld.c: 1259: dl_main: Assertion

Bug#219352: xmms libc crash

Jeff Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 12:49:38AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: I also have this problem, this is since I updated libc to the -ds* versions. Also since libc 2.3 I cannot execute /lib/libc.so.6, I get: Inconsistency detected by ld.so: rtld.c: 1259:

Bug#219940: Also seeing this bug

I'm also suffering from this bug, with the headers from libbluetooth1-dev (which I maintain.) /usr/include/bluetooth/rfcomm.h:#define RFCOMMGETDEVLIST _IOR('R', 210, int) means this doesn't compile: if (ioctl(ctl, RFCOMMGETDEVLIST, (void *) dl) 0) { with an error warning: signed and

Anfrage

Hallo,ich sammel schon seit 22 Jahren Kugelschreiber,leider ist es mir noch nicht gelungen, einen Kulimit Ihrem Logo zu bekommen. Können sie mir eventuell weiterhelfen?Im Vorraus vielen Dank.Mit freundlichen GrüßenKirsten SchnabelMeine Adresse lautet:Kirsten SchnabelProsperstr. 36946238

Bug#219352: xmms libc crash

On Tuesday 11 November 2003 18:19, Juergen Kreileder wrote: Jeff Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 12:49:38AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: I also tested on both 2.4 and 2.6 kernel, even with removing ~/.xmms. However I cannot reproduce it... Which CPU do you use? I

Bug#220232: linux/time.h conflicts with time.h

Hi, here is a patch that makes linux/time.h work alongside with time.h for userspace inclusion. I include time.h for userspace and don't redefine some structures. A problem might be that some of the elements of the structures have different names in time.h I think. The case I had (openh323) only

Processed: severity of 220232 is important

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: severity 220232 important Bug#220232: libpt: ptlib.h includes both time.h and linux/time.h Severity set to `important'. End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator

Re: ld.so and the FAQ

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:12:14AM -0800, Jeff Bailey wrote: You probably want this FAQ entry: Which, I've been informed, is in fact in README.Debian.gz. * errno: If a program uses the variable errno, then it _must_ include errno.h. The old libc often (erroneously) declared this

Re: ld.so and the FAQ

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 08:47:25AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: Yeah, there was another bug against cyrus for this, with patch, but I didn't make any sort of connection. Good to know I've just whacked three bugs for the price of one... grin Think of it this way. It feels that much better

Bug#220331: linux-kernel-headers: parse error in buffer_head.h

Package: linux-kernel-headers Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-9 Severity: important snippet from my log - you can reproduce by trying to build dosfstools on ia64. I tested this specifically to look for regressions, because I recall this being broken fixed at one point (can't find the bug report at

Processed: reopening 68602

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: reopen 68602 Bug#68602: glibc-doc: GLOB_PERIOD incorrectly documented Bug reopened, originator not changed. End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator,